About your Search

CNN 21
English 21
Search Results 0 to 20 of about 21 (some duplicates have been removed)
can call the obama doctrine, when to deploy u.s. military forces around the world. he laid out the case when it's in the united states interest to use military force, when it's in the united states interest not to use military force, and this is the example that he gave, this is going to be the precedent, what the united states has done now in libya, presumably given the explosion of unrest that's happening right now throughout north africa and the middle east, if there are similar circumstances that develop in other countries, whether in syria, or yemen and bahrain, and the potential of mass slaughter of civilians is there, the pressure will be on this president to go ahead and authorize what the president authorized in libya. and the greatest potential for the u.s., if there's a revolution, and if there's serious unrest in iran and the people are standing up against mahmoud ahmadinejad and the i ayatollahs take similar action as far as iran is concerned. i think we can call this the obama doctrine. >> and he also made it clear what the limits of this mission is as he sees it
. this is an earthquake of a different kind. this is a political earthquake. the u.s. government, the american government's top nuclear official is coming out and saying things are far worse than the japanese government has said. you can imagine what the meetings are like in tokyo among government officials in japan. now, the utility reportedly is still denying this is the case, that the water has leaked out, but when you look at the testimony and two press conferences afterwards, american officials have been quite insistent and an american team had arrived earlier in the day so clearly they got information relayed it to washington. my guess is then washington warned tokyo, hey, you know, we're going to make this announcement just so you know but if you're in the japanese government, imagine what is happening now because your people are now going to seriously doubt the statements you're making about the nature of the crisis. >> it is amazing. the american top nuclear official has cast doubt on virtually everything the japanese government has said. let's go to tom foreman. he will show us with all his map
where could the first strikes come from? perhaps u.s. naval vessels. cruise missiles could be involved. there are nato air bases that could be used in any no-fly zone. one immediate concern, the libyan military, while not powerful, has a stro anti-aircraft surface-to-air missile system here. watch for strikes first in the days ahead. we'll be on top this tomorrow as well as the japan crisis. "in the arena" right now. >>> good evening, i'm eliot spitzer, welcome to the program. will cain and gloria borger join plea and we'll go to anderson cooper in a moment on the story of the most desperate methods to stem the radiation from the crippled nuclear reactors. photos taken from military aircraft by people who surely risked their lives show just how grave the damage is. look at that and imagine how difficult it will be to save the crippled facility. but first, breaking news just coming in. there could, emphasis could, be an attack on libya very soon, indeed within hours. the battle for benghazi, the battle for libya may well be about to begin. this after the united nations passe
against gadhafi. and that leaves the u.s. still in charge. here's the secretary of state, hillary clinton, just moments ago. >> from the start, president obama has stressed that the role of the u.s. military would be limited in time and scope. our mission has been to use america's unique capabilities to create the conditions for the no-fly zone and to assist in meeting urgent humanitarian needs. >> earlier i spoke with elise jordan, a speechwriter for clinton's predecessor, condoleezza rice. she also worked with the national security council. elise, thank you very much for being with us. so is the u.n. involvement limited in time and scope, or are we taking it over? >> i would disagree that it's going to be limited in time and scope. and i think that you are not alone in being confused about what's going on. i think confusion is really the buzz word. and this strategy is being developed on the fly. a coalition being developed on the fly, and that is not going to make for a smooth transition or a smooth operation in my opinion. >> you know, i actually had a lot of hope when the arab league
, the term that was used in testimony by a senior u.s. army official was flickers of evidence of an al qaeda presence, a jihadist presence. what do you sense being there and how do you quantify this, if at all. >> reporter: look, you know, it's a red flag which has to be remembered is not the first to raise it so one has to be careful in this sort of game not to play into what is an inevitable part of any war which is psychological propaganda. most of us on the ground who hear this al qaeda specter being raised it's the kind of thing that immediately resounds in the united states and causes a lot of people to freeze. you know, there's hardly a country which doesn't have some sort of anti-western jihadi i would say al qaeda might be stretching it presence amongst its population, after all, the last ten years have been -- we all know what's happened in the last ten years, but in libya it seems there is a small group of devout muslim men, some of whom fought in wars over the past decade in other countries but they do not have control of the movement and they seem to even welcome the american pr
, it looks like a long-term stalemate is a possible outcome. tonight's question -- will the u.s. and our allies have the political will to continue the longer efforts to drive gadhafi out of office if the war boggs down? and can we accomplish our objectives within the constraints of the u.n. resolution? we go to nic robertson in tripoli. it seems the gadhafi regime continues to try to spin a story. what are you seeing, and what are they trying to tell you? >> reporter: they continue to try show us that there were civilian casualties here. they believe if they can do that that will weaken the resolve. they took us to a farmhouse on the outskirts of the city where a missile or rocket had impacted in the farmland. they told us there would be civilian casualties. the stories we heard didn't add up. it was clear something had impacted, but there were no casualties to see and conflicting stories about who and what had been hit. what we did see driving out of the city to the east, clear signs of how the coalition aerial bombardment is effective here. we saw damaged bases, damaged buildings, and
kingdom all flying flights. you see the different airports used coordinated from here the u.s. command in germany. this activity all directed enforcing the no-fly zone. more tomorrow. "in the arena" starts now. >>> good evening. i'm eliot spitzer. here with me is edie hill. what do you have tonight? >> we're watching what's happening in japan and the middle east. turmoil there. the question is japan is whether they stick with nuclear energy or turn to oil. how it impacts what you pay for gas, food and anything else you will purchase for six months out. we'll discuss it. >> fascinating and important issue. sounds great. tonight we start with breaking news from libya. anti-aircraft guns continue to light up the skies over tripoli. coalition forces launched another round of air strikes. day three of the military engagement in libya and the question is -- now what? after missiles halted ghadafi's forces. he controls much of the country. the multi day barrage leaves a nation divided. the shaded area covers the no-fly zone territory enforced by the coalition. air strikes concentrated mostly
's exactly right. you know, it is sort of deeply ironic and unfortunate. so, you know, the u.s. and soviet union are reducing their nuclear arsenals. we want them to reduce their nuclear arsenals. we want reduction in the nuclear threat. but when you start to dismantle the weapons, what do you do with all the nuclear material that was inside the nuclear weapons? and so there is a big sort of debate between the u.s. and russia about this. the u.s. said let's just bury the stuff. let's just get rid of it and bury it. the russians thought of it quite differently. they thought of it as an asset. and so there is disagreement here. in the mid 90s, the decision was the main thing is let's just get it out of here in whatever way so sayterrorists don't get it, the decision was, okay, what we'll do with it. we'll take the stuff that used to be in nuclear weapons and burn it in a nuclear reactor and that way we get energy out of it. a lot of u.s. plants using that. other plants are using it, seems to work fine. of course, we've never been in this situation before where this particular fuel is exposed
're alone. and so something has to happen. the international community, iaea, the u.s. -- someone has to step in and help these people out because, you know, if you have four reactors that are all having problems, different problems, you got 50 people on the ground, you know, at some point someone's going to make a mistake. and they need to -- they need more help than they're getting. >> this crisis is getting worse and worse. jim, stay with us. we have questions for you that are going to be coming up. right now we'll bring in the man who is one of the commissioners in charge of the u.s. nuclear regulatory agency during the three mile island disaster. he's seen a lot and has a lot to say about what's going on. right now let me bring in victor gillespie -- gallinski, excuse me. in your assessment is, this worse than three mile island, and if so, why? >> well, it's much worse than three mile island. actually, each of the individual problems, each of the reactors is itself an accident that is worse than three mile island. and three mile island, all the equipment worked basically. the mis
will agree to a cease-fire, what happens then? does that take away the basis, the predicate for the u.s. and our allies to go in to enforce the no-fly zone, and do we then basically have a cease-fire in place, a status quo that leaves gadhafi in place? >> it might make it a little bit harder to act. but having now already both the arab league as of about a week ago and the security council, it seems to me we should go ahead and establish a no-fly zone and bring him under more and more pressure. there's nothing wrong with our hoping for -- forcing gadhafi from office if people don't want to pass resolutions making that the thrust of our efforts. nonetheless, by showing substantial support, having aircraft fly over libya and if necessary take out elizabeth yaan air -- libyan air defenses, perhaps we could listen to what he has to say. but to believe he says being truthful, anybody who believes that, you have a bridge in new york up in brooklyn that they ought to put in a bid on. >> look, many people fwhaboughtt bridge. nobody i don't think believes that gadhafi is observing the cease-fire
the coast of the u.s. to allow the water to go under. buildings are built like that there. the water went under, people were above the water as it went under and they survived. >> we just had an interview with ryan mcdonald, had footage of his building which was almost sideways. now it's gone back to the way it was supposed to look. unbelievable what preparedness can do. thank you very much, chad, for the fascinating conversation. i- i've enjoyed listening to you. we'll take a break and be right back. we're america's natural gas. and here's what we did today in homes all across america: we created the electricity that powered the alarm clocks and brewed the coffee. we heated the bathwater and gave kelly a cleaner ride to school. cooked the cube steaks and steamed the veggies. entertained dad, and mom, and a neighbor or two. kept watch on the house when they slept. and tomorrow we could do even more. we're cleaner, domestic, abundant and ready now. we're america's natural gas. the smarter power today. learn more at anga.us. at 190 miles per hour, the wind will literally lift ordinary winds
from the u.s. military, we rule the airwaves, we have accomplished our military objective in terms of creating a no-fly zone but don't seem yet, and certainly it's only four days in, to be cracking gadhafi's will to fight back. and if the objective is to have him leave office, are we getting closer to that? >> i think our military objective so far have been much more limited. and in that sense, the narrow sense, they've succeeded masterfully. we have suppressed his anti-aircraft capacity. we've now captured the skies over libya. and we've beaten him back so that he's not been able to get into benghazi. those are the goals, we've succeeded. we have an extraordinary trained military, the best trained in all of history. we're up against a force of like 10,000 who have decrepit equipment. it's not surprising we would succeed. the hard part is still ahead, isn't it? we see no signs, as nic robertson suggested, we see no signs that there's a crack in the circle around him. that there's going to be an overthrow, a coup from within. that it appears he's going to fight on. and now we're beg
. joining us is someone urging the u.s. to arm rebels. bill richardson, the former democratic governor of new mexico served as u.s. ambassador to the u.n. and energy secretary in the clinton white house. governor, welcome to the show. we're all firing questions at you so get ready and strap on the seat belts. >> all right. i'm ready. >> let me throw the first one at you. i'm with you on the no-fly zone concept. explain to the public why a no-fly zone, when's the justification, political, ethical, military. why do you favor it? >> well, i favor it internationally recognized it should be done. u.s. leadership but through nato. why? to intervene and averting a huge humanitarian crisis caused by gadhafi wanting to maintain control and making a carnage of his own people. there's also energy supply routes. libya is a major energy producer and responsibilities to western nations, to america. gas prices. i think the main reason is humanitarian. this is strategic part out mediterranean. i think we also as america needs to associate ourselves with a democratic protester movements that are emergi
-- the u.s. should not do this unilaterally. but at the nato summit meeting with defense ministers thursday, he needs to come out of that meeting, nato needs to come out with a plan of action that sends a clear message to gadhafi and the people around him, your days are up, the game is over. >> david, will cain here. i want to ask a question, we could be waiting on an international coalition or approval to sanction action. i've been asking this question over and over -- why would we intervene in libya, i still haven't received an answer that totally satisfies me. the most consistent one is that it would be the right thing to do because people are dying. for altruistic reasons. here's my question -- if we're looking to do the right thing, why do we need international approval to do the right thing? >> i think it's extraordinarily important especially with the president who is committed to the principles of international cooperation, collaboration, working through the u.n. i think it's extremely important that this president stick to his principles. i do think he's going to have a hard time g
're asking that question because we use meltdown in common language here in the u.s. we talk about a financial meltdown or a kid that has a meltdown. and it's associated with the worst possible outcome that you can imagine. really what we're talking about with respect to the nuclear rods, the fuel rods in those reactors, is really a range of different things. you know, imagine there's a candle and you warm the candle and the candle begins to deform, it gets to bend a little bit. that's a partial meltdown. then maybe after derchling a i- deforming and bending it melts down. then if it also melts and flows as hot wax to the bottom of a dish, that's a full meltdown. but there are a lot of degrees in between. but none of them are welcome. let's be clear, none of it is good. but the worst part, a full meltdown, is some distance from a partial meltdown. >> now what does it then mean -- we have the statement today, that three of the six reactors have had a partial meltdown. what does that mean in terms of long-term radiation leaks, the long-term capacity to clean up the site, and the risk
from power and leave. >> i also have stated that it is u.s. policy that gadhafi needs to go. moammar gadhafi has lost legitimacy to lead and he must leave. >> but then moments ago on this network the deputy national security adviser contradicted the president saying america's policy in libya is not one of regime change. take a listen. >> as it relates to the specific question, wolf, we're not setting out with a policy of regime change here. we set out a very defined goal here which is we would shape the environment and enable our international partners to take over the no-fly zone, we're on the verge of doing that. >> which is it and how can you run a military operation if you don't know with clarity what your objective is? we'll ask john negroponte in a moment. first live to arwa damon in benghazi where resistance forces are struggling to regroup after weeks of relentless attacks. arwa, how have the air strikes impacted the opposition's ability to move forward and regain critical ground? >> reporter: well, eliot, they've impacted it significantly, more importantly many people will t
for diplomatic immunity and therefore was not subject to prosecution in pakistani courts. the u.s. has insisted that he is covered by this diplomatic immunity and demanded that the spockies turn him over -- pakistanis turn him over. the pakistanis have let this become very political. today a court in pakistan ruled that he does not qualify for diplomatic immunity, which means that if things go forward, he'll have to stand trial. this is as big a mess as i've seen between these two countries. allies in a long time. it's one that's making people both in the u.s. and in the pakistani government pretty nervous. >> look, we'll get into the larger geopolitics this in a moment. the first question is does he have diplomatic immunity? there was contradictory evidence. was he a cia contractor, was he a diplomat, was he listed as a consular employee? two people are dead, shot in the back, and this seems to be shaping up as a battle between the cia, our good guys, and the isi, the pakistani secret service. this is a proxy war, in fact, isn't it? >> well, it's a battle between two intelligence services. the
day at the wind farm. heated 57 million u.s. homes. simmered grandma's chicken noodle soup. melted tons of recycled glass. roasted millions of coffee beans. provided electricity for nearly 29 million home computers. heated your bathwater. cooked your takeout. lit your way home. we helped america import less of its energy. cleared the air by burning cleaner than other fuel sources, with less pollutants and no mercury. and tomorrow, we could do even more. we're cleaner, domestic, abundant and ready now. we're america's natural gas. the smarter power today. learn more at anga.us. >>> joining us now congressman ron paul, the philosophical leader of the tea party. while i may disagree with everything he says he has the intellectual integrity to put his cards on the table and tell us where he will cut the budget and for that he deserves a round of applause, popular though or unpopular though these ideas may be, congressman, a pleasure to have you on the show. welcome. you voted against the continuing resolution that was passed in the house of the representatives the other day to keep the
. on the other hand, i wasn't a fan of the republican u.s. senators in washington filibustering so critical legislation there couldn't be brought to a vote. both of these are procedural games. both of them should be dealt with. let's put process aside for a minute. i want to come back to the question i asked you before. is it fair -- just a basic issue of fairness -- to be cutting hundreds of millions of dollars out of your education budget at the same time you cut the capital gains taxes for the wealthiest folks in wisconsin? how do you square those two, you're cutting education and giving money back to the wealthy? isn't there a tension there? >> well, ultimately, education will be fine because of these changes to collective bargaining. and on the tax cut side, i mean, we've been doing since january 3 inaugural tax cut after tax cut, and the reason for that is because we're trying to get the -- the economy moving here. i mean, we've got a jobless rate that is poor, just like many other states. and as a result of that, we need to really ramp up and get economic development moving, and some
another step, increase the use of nato assets including u.s. ships in the mediterranean sea for humanitarian supplies. that is a likely outcome. the more controversial thing, the thing we'll watch, more controversial dlin race is whether to impose a no-fly zone. that takes more ships and more planes and include more risk, a big step the white house is trying to resist. we'll track this tomorrow and see you then and "the arena" starts right now. >>> good evening, i'm eliot. welcome to the program. breaking news in madison, wisconsin, and a lot of angry people. it's a tense scene. our regulars, e.d. hill is here. exciting, amazing stuff. here's what is going on. after nearly a month-long standoff over public unions and the issue of collective bargaining republican senators have made their move and voted to take away almost all collective bargaining rights from public workers without any democrats present. remember, they're all on the lam in chicago and came up with a way to bypass the missing senators. let me explain how. when this was part of the state budget it was considere
Search Results 0 to 20 of about 21 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (31 Dec 2014)